Print 43 comment(s) - last by Qapa.. on Feb 19 at 11:12 AM

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers asked that some credits be given to automakers that improve technology to meet 2012-2016 requirements

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers approached the Obama Administration earlier this week to request the use of credits to meet the proposed fuel efficiency standards.

Last year, major automakers, the state of California, and the White House agreed on the new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) proposal that would boost fleet wide fuel economy to 54.5 mpg by 2025. The effort aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lessen the country's dependency on foreign oil. The new rules also included a mid-term review to make sure that the 2021-2025 requirements are probable, which the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers also addressed this week.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents Toyota Motor Corp., Detroit's Big Three automakers and eight other automakers, has requested that carmakers obtain some credits for improving technology to meet 2012-2016 requirements set by the new fuel efficiency standards proposal instead of automakers only receiving credits if they are "in use in a minimum percentage of its overall fleet."

"Providing this program feature in the earlier years improves the usefulness of the credit program and encourages manufacturers to introduce the listed technologies sooner," said the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

More specifically, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers would like automakers to obtain some credits for improving active grill shutters, start-stop technology, air conditioning and high efficiency lights for the 2012-2016 technology requirements.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers also asked that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) explain the mid-term evaluation process as well as the specifics that will be reviewed. In addition, automakers want to know that the "timeline and procedures for assuring that the studies relied upon by the agencies are appropriately peer reviewed."

Automakers added that they shouldn't be held responsible for emissions from electricity generation from EVs.

"Automakers may now be called on to not only make an unprecedented investment into vehicles with lower emissions, but to also fill the void between this rulemaking and a comprehensive national energy policy," said the automakers.

The new rules are expected to save drivers $1.7 trillion at the pump, but the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) said last month that the new proposal could add as much as $5,000 to the sticker price of a new vehicle in 2025.

Source: The Detroit News

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: consumer choice
By Keeir on 2/14/2012 5:35:46 PM , Rating: 2
I see it like this. At some point the endless spihon of gas will run short. it will likely be political, or possibly supply based, but at some point, demand will outdo supply and when it happens, prices will skyrocket, and the ecomony of the entire planet will crash, and crash hard.

Any idea when this is going to occur? I mean, I am fairly sure we have seen predicted dates for "peak" oil come and go.

The free market cant/wont see that. The free market will buy V8 SUV's until a crisis happens.

No. The free market will purchase vechile capacites whoose understood long term cost is less than the long term value placed on the cars.

Believe it or not, the "Free" market responds very well to raising prices without CAFE interference.

And the entire time your assuming I think CAFE is wrong (which I do, but that's beside the point). Even if you support CAFE, you absolutely have to admit that it interferes with consumer choice. That's the basis of CAFE! To force manufacturers to force consumers to choose certain models of cars. That was my original point and it remains such. It is dishonest to support CAFE and claim it doesn't interfer with consumer choice.

If we aren't pushing these technologies, when it happens, we will be screwed. Not might be screwed, we will be screwed, all of us.

So you can see the future? I've always had difficulty with arguement. More so today than at times in the past. There exists significant technologies that are just barely economically worse than current oil technologies. Oil Sands, Biofuels, EVs, PHEVs, and gasp Public Transportation come to mind. Not sure why hobbling ourselves today to potentially avoid a crises of which we don't know the magnitude is the appropriate response.

RE: consumer choice
By retrospooty on 2/14/2012 6:01:31 PM , Rating: 2

"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki